Par 5

[Ironman]

According to Google Earth, it is 300' with about 25' of elevation change. 300+25*3=375'. So, it plays like 375' to the mando. In my experience, that sounds about right.

Actually its "A" squared + "B" squared = "C" squared.
300' sq + 25' sq = 301' 15/32"

[weeman]

I see what you're getting at but course designers generally use this as a guideline for measuring relative (or effective) distance. Here's a link to the PDGA boards that further explains it.

http://www.pdga.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=17848

Take hole 2 at CV where say the elevation difference isn't much off of hole 18, its listed as 270 but pretty much everyone that is trying to reach the green (pros included) will be throwing a driver. 270+(3*25) = 345' versus (270^2)+(25^2)=(271.15^2). That's a large difference on how far you're huking it up there. Its just a rule of thumb though on design and isn't applicable in all situations.

[LtDan914]

For every foot of elevation change add or subtract 3 feet of distance. That is generally what the hole will play like.

[Ironman]

I see what you're getting at but course designers generally use this as a guideline for measuring relative (or effective) distance. Here's a link to the PDGA boards that further explains it.

http://www.pdga.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=17848

Take hole 2 at CV where say the elevation difference isn't much off of hole 18, its listed as 270 but pretty much everyone that is trying to reach the green (pros included) will be throwing a driver. 270+(3*25) = 345' versus (270^2)+(25^2)=(271.15^2). That's a large difference on how far you're huking it up there. Its just a rule of thumb though on design and isn't applicable in all situations.

BAH, thats too complicated.

[jworley]

I really enjoy the par 4's at SL. One can only hope this is the direction the game is headed Im sure when some of the older course's were built what we look at now as par 3 were par 4. Also no love for The Green Monster (hole 5) at Mt. Airy 700 foot dog leg right road OB the length of the hole. I think a few of you have played this and probally forgot about it or consider it a 4. I think its a legit 5. If I were to design a course I would really only want one maybe two legit par five's, then have alot of par 4's. If you were creating a venue for NT's then more par five's would be Ideal.

[Adam]

I think Mt. Airy has changed since I was last there. I looked at my scorecard from when I played there in 2009 and hole 10 was the 700ft hole not hole 5. Is that the same hole just with different numbering?

At any rate I agree with you, a lot holes we think of as par 3 now used to be par 4's. I bet Otter had a number of par 4's if you're using a wham-o or aviar.

[weeman]

Adam, yeah the numbering at Airy is different. "Old" number 1 is now number 14 and "new" number 1 is old number 6. It starts off next to the pro shop now.

[bwilson217]

I think that Hole #9 at SL is my favorite there because it is a "true" Par 4. It takes an accurate long drive (or two) to get to the tunnel, a throw down the pipe, and a putt at the basket. Great hole.

I think that I read somewhere above that someone hopes this is the direction the sport is headed in, I couldn't agree more. I think SL really brings the "golf" aspect to the table, rather than having birdie opportunities every hole. When disc golf hits the mainstream, I'm sure we will see more courses like SL.